"How does HR measure its performance and contribution to the business? I am keen to find out about effectiveness rather than efficiency measures such as cost per hire, time fill vacancies etc. Any thoughts and experience you have had is much appreciated. Best regards, Anushia"

I have a short article written by Dave Forman of Human Capital Institute that does a nice job outlining the types of measures you are asking about. Drop me an email at email@removed and I'll be glad to send it along.

Anushia,
I believe it is important to have managment buy-in on whatever metrics you utilise. I work for a mid-cap mining company. I surveyed our managment team with a choice of 29 Metrics and this is the result:
? Employee Engagement - From survey results the percentage of employees who ?look forward to coming to work? everyday
? Employee Engagement - From survey results, the percentage of employees who feel that their manager?s exercise expected management behaviours such as 2-way communication, challenging and exciting work, individual growth & learning, recognition and reward, etc.
? Recruitment - Recruitment time to fill role. (time from commencement of recruitment to new employee accepting the role)
? Recruitment - Recruiting quality ? average performance appraisal scores of new hires
? Retention - Turnover of high performers in key roles
? Management Satisfaction with HR/Administrative functions in terms of their contribution to productivity and in assisting the manager meet performance goals (Survey)
? Employee Relations - Percentage of employees who are considered top performers from the performance appraisal who are paid above the average (Median?)
? Employee Relations - Percentage of performance appraisals completed on time ? half yearly and annual
? Employee Relations - Percentage of low performing employees from performance appraisal process who had training & development improvement strategies identified
? Employee Relations - Percentage of low performing employees whose supervisor/manager followed up on identified T&D improvement strategies.
? HR Goals Met - Percentage of top priority HR goals that were met or exceeded during the year

I agree with management buyin. I would also add that you decide if and what you are going to do if the numbers do not meet expectations. If the answer is nothing then I would suggest that you don't waste time collecting the data. I have seen this situation all too often.

Answered

Sorry! Something went wrong on our end. Please try again later.

TBaut

September 24, 2009 06:04 PM

Great input! I would also inject that these metrics must have some basis of value that can be shown with the percentage results - it doesn't necessarily have to be monetary, but the value is what you are selling the executives. Make no mistake, you must sell your value to the executive body the same way they must sell the value of the product/service offered by the company.

And therein lies the challenge. As with any Metrics, HR is answerable to managment to improve underperforming areas. They are in fact a measure of the HR person's performance, so if improvement is not forthcoming over time in underperforming Metrics areas this will potentially impact on tenure.

Answered

Sorry! Something went wrong on our end. Please try again later.

Anand_K_Padmanaban

September 24, 2009 08:46 PM

As others have indicated, it could be organization specific as well but some
of the more common effectiveness metrics I have listed ...New Hire
Productivity, Turnover Rates, Cost per turnover (segmented by
tenure), Advertising effectiveness For recruiting, leadership pipeline
management (Percent of employees at A, B, C type roles) , Profitability of
the workforce, Human Capital Index of the organization
Hope this helps ...
Anand Kumar
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 1:48 AM, Anushia via measurement-metrics <
measurement-metrics@hr.toolbox.com> wrote:
> Posted by Anushia(Executive Director, Organisational Effectiveness)
> on Sep 24 at 4:24 PM How does HR measure its performance and
> contribution to the business? I am keen to find out about effectiveness
> rather than efficiency measures such as cost per hire, time fill vacancies
> etc. Any thoughts and experience you have had is much appreciated.
> Best regards, Anushia

Posted by Anand_K_Padmanaban (CEO)
on Sep 24 at 8:45 PM Mark as helpful <http://hr.toolbox.com/api/ContentVote/3017251/1/2/>
As others have indicated, it could be organization specific as well but some
of the more common effectiveness metrics I have listed ...New Hire
Productivity, Turnover Rates, Cost per turnover (segmented by
tenure), Advertising effectiveness For recruiting, leadership pipeline
management (Percent of employees at A, B, C type roles) , Profitability of
the workforce, Human Capital Index of the organization
Hope this helps ...
Anand Kumar
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 1:48 AM, Anushia via measurement-metrics <
measurement-metrics@hr.toolbox.com> wrote:
> Posted by Anushia(Executive Director, Organisational Effectiveness)
> on Sep 24 at 4:24 PM How does HR measure its performance and
> contribution to the business? I am keen to find out about effectiveness
> rather than efficiency measures such as cost per hire, time fill vacancies
> etc. Any thoughts and experience you have had is much appreciated.
> Best regards, Anushia

Thanks Hans. I agree that the business needs to buy in and in my case the business is driving this. They are keen to go beyond efficiency and want to know how HR is helping to drive business results and performance - I can see this through some of the metrics you have shared. Thank you.
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
-----Original Message-----
From: HansVulker via measurement-metrics <measurement-metrics@hr.toolbox.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 21:40:08
To: <anushiaredd@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE:[measurement-metrics] HR Effectiveness

Posted by HansVulker (Mr)
on Sep 24 at 5:42 PM Mark as helpful <http://hr.toolbox.com/api/ContentVote/3016985/1/2/>
Anushia,
I believe it is important to have managment buy-in on whatever metrics you utilise. I work for a mid-cap mining company. I surveyed our managment team with a choice of 29 Metrics and this is the result:
? Employee Engagement - From survey results the percentage of employees who ?look forward to coming to work? everyday
? Employee Engagement - From survey results, the percentage of employees who feel that their manager?s exercise expected management behaviours such as 2-way communication, challenging and exciting work, individual growth & learning, recognition and reward, etc.
? Recruitment - Recruitment time to fill role. (time from commencement of recruitment to new employee accepting the role)
? Recruitment - Recruiting quality ? average performance appraisal scores of new hires
? Retention - Turnover of high performers in key roles
? Management Satisfaction with HR/Administrative functions in terms of their contribution to productivity and in assisting the manager meet performance goals (Survey)
? Employee Relations - Percentage of employees who are considered top performers from the performance appraisal who are paid above the average (Median?)
? Employee Relations - Percentage of performance appraisals completed on time ? half yearly and annual
? Employee Relations - Percentage of low performing employees from performance appraisal process who had training & development improvement strategies identified
? Employee Relations - Percentage of low performing employees whose supervisor/manager followed up on identified T&D improvement strategies.
? HR Goals Met - Percentage of top priority HR goals that were met or exceeded during the year

Answered

Sorry! Something went wrong on our end. Please try again later.

David_Alman

October 04, 2009 09:55 AM

Hi Anushia,
My response is quite different to those already provided, and so may be offbeam. If so, apologies.
My understanding of the effectiveness and contribution of HR (as opposed to its efficiency) is that its about its results. As a Director I assume your (performance) action plan fits into the business/organisational annual plan and contains measurable targets the business seeks from your unit. In turn your staff have their performance action plans to achieve (that are subsets of the Unit's plan). Your unit's effectiveness and contribution therefore is based on two aspects: Meeting agreed targets, and maintaining set (governance) standards. Trust this helps. David

Hi David
Thanks for your response which is helpful. Part of what I'm looking for are productivity measures and also whilst we do link performance plans back to business plan it's about understanding how effective HR was in contributing.
Thanks again, I need to use you input and make the measures more specific.
Anushia
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
-----Original Message-----
From: David_Alman via measurement-metrics <measurement-metrics@hr.toolbox.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 07:23:04
To: <anushiaredd@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE:[measurement-metrics] HR Effectiveness

Posted by David_Alman (Contractor & Director)
on Oct 4 at 9:51 AM Mark as helpful <http://hr.toolbox.com/api/ContentVote/3034497/1/2/>
Hi Anushia,
My response is quite different to those already provided, and so may be offbeam. If so, apologies.
My understanding of the effectiveness and contribution of HR (as opposed to its efficiency) is that its about its results. As a Director I assume your (performance) action plan fits into the business/organisational annual plan and contains measurable targets the business seeks from your unit. In turn your staff have their performance action plans to achieve (that are subsets of the Unit's plan). Your unit's effectiveness and contribution therefore is based on two aspects: Meeting agreed targets, and maintaining set (governance) standards. Trust this helps. David

At the risk of not knowing exactly what the question was just the
following on HR's contribution to business success.

The ultimate productivity measure will be net profit per employee (FTE)
which should be shared by HR and line ito their respective scorecards
albeit with different weightings.

Then purely ito performance, HR should be measured by the alignment of
the hard results and performance contract content. Performance contracts
which carries a heavy weighting on financials should correlate highly
with the financial results such as asset and liaibility growth in
Banking, same argument for customer service and process. If your process
audits are mostly unacceptables, but your contracts which use process
measurements are high, there is a disconnect and it is HR's job to fix
this.

Then you also need to manage the performance curve as a whole. If your
business are doing poorly, but you sit with upwards of 40% 4 ratings on
a 5 point scale you are in trouble, because then your line people are
busy soft-scoring and entrenching an acceptance of poor performance. HR
need to push back and calibrate scoring across the business as this is
one of the biggest contributors to productivity.
This can be measured as well.

Posted by Anushia (Executive
Director, Organisational Effectiveness)
on Oct 5 at 3:22 AM
Mark this reply as helpfulMark as helpful
<http://hr.toolbox.com/api/ContentVote/3035194/1/2/>
Hi David
Thanks for your response which is helpful. Part of what I'm looking for
are productivity measures and also whilst we do link performance plans
back to business plan it's about understanding how effective HR was in
contributing.
Thanks again, I need to use you input and make the measures more
specific.
Anushia
Sent from my BlackBerry(r) wireless device
-----Original Message-----
From: David_Alman via measurement-metrics
<measurement-metrics@hr.toolbox.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 07:23:04
To: <anushiaredd@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE:[measurement-metrics] HR Effectiveness

Posted by David_Alman (Contractor & Director)
on Oct 4 at 9:51 AM Mark as helpful
<http://hr.toolbox.com/api/ContentVote/3034497/1/2/>
Hi Anushia,
My response is quite different to those already provided, and so may be
offbeam. If so, apologies.
My understanding of the effectiveness and contribution of HR (as opposed
to its efficiency) is that its about its results. As a Director I assume
your (performance) action plan fits into the business/organisational
annual plan and contains measurable targets the business seeks from your
unit. In turn your staff have their performance action plans to achieve
(that are subsets of the Unit's plan). Your unit's effectiveness and
contribution therefore is based on two aspects: Meeting agreed targets,
and maintaining set (governance) standards. Trust this helps. David

The disadvantage with productivity measures are that the team may then is driven by meeting the measures and not by increasing the value of contribution. The measures may show that targets etc are being met but the customer/client experience may be quite different. John Seddons has wirtten a couple of books on the subject. They are not HR specific but the principles are transferable to most functions in an organisation. If you're interested they are "Freedom from Command and Control" and "I Want You to Cheat".

Answered

Sorry! Something went wrong on our end. Please try again later.

ClintonWingrove

October 05, 2009 06:33 AM

Well said. Dogma around the values of a few specific/focused goals
often fails to recognize the reality that (a) goals in themselves do not
enhance performance; only goals to which people are committed can even
hope to do so, (b) goals without attention to how those might be met can
create frustration rather than engagement, and (c) if the 'goals
combined with effective day to day management' do not ensure attention
to holistic performance then the net effect can be destructive. We need
to get out of the mindset of reducing performance management to its most
trivial common denominator, focus on effectiveness and then make it as
simple as possible.

Posted by Goonergirl (Project
Manager)
on Oct 5 at 5:10 AM
Mark this reply as helpfulMark as helpful
<http://hr.toolbox.com/api/ContentVote/3035405/1/2/>
The disadvantage with productivity measures are that the team may then
is driven by meeting the measures and not by increasing the value of
contribution. The measures may show that targets etc are being met but
the customer/client experience may be quite different. John Seddons has
wirtten a couple of books on the subject. They are not HR specific but
the principles are transferable to most functions in an organisation. If
you're interested they are ""Freedom from Command and Control"" and ""I
Want You to Cheat"".

Answered

Sorry! Something went wrong on our end. Please try again later.

ClintonWingrove

October 05, 2009 06:58 AM

Some good thoughts. I would add three points:
1. Organizations that are dedicated to performance management
(rather than merely making appraisals easier) are realizing that it is
important to collect ratings at a more precise/elemental level where
objectivity is more likely e.g., ratings on each objective, each
competency, ... If this is done, it is possible to use statistical
analysis to detect the potential harsh, lenient and bland raters and to
quantify that factor to an extent that you can even compute a debiased
performance index (e.g., by standardizing the ratings onto a common new
scale). This index can then be used to inform multiple decisions.
2. If such an approach (even without the debiasing) is taken, then
real-time feedback can be provided to raters. This is far more
effective than providing them feedback post-process, or by capping
budgets etc to compensate. Real-time feedback enables them to reflect,
calibrate and re-rate before data usage.
3. I agree that HR has to be more proactive and that it has a role
to play. However, I would prefer to see the line calibrate their own
rating standards even if not in such a sophisticated way as above. HR's
role should be to provide the tools and then monitor process compliance;
not take ownership of the root problem.

Posted by gertkriel (Head
Organisational Effectiveness)
on Oct 5 at 3:45 AM
Mark this reply as helpfulMark as helpful
<http://hr.toolbox.com/api/ContentVote/3035231/1/2/>
Hi Anushia,
Nice to hear from you again.
At the risk of not knowing exactly what the question was just the
following on HR's contribution to business success.
The ultimate productivity measure will be net profit per employee (FTE)
which should be shared by HR and line ito their respective scorecards
albeit with different weightings.
Then purely ito performance, HR should be measured by the alignment of
the hard results and performance contract content. Performance contracts
which carries a heavy weighting on financials should correlate highly
with the financial results such as asset and liaibility growth in
Banking, same argument for customer service and process. If your process
audits are mostly unacceptables, but your contracts which use process
measurements are high, there is a disconnect and it is HR's job to fix
this.
Then you also need to manage the performance curve as a whole. If your
business are doing poorly, but you sit with upwards of 40% 4 ratings on
a 5 point scale you are in trouble, because then your line people are
busy soft-scoring and entrenching an acceptance of poor performance. HR
need to push back and calibrate scoring across the business as this is
one of the biggest contributors to productivity.
This can be measured as well.

Posted by Anushia (Executive
Director, Organisational Effectiveness)
on Oct 5 at 3:22 AM
Mark this reply as helpfulMark as helpful
<http://hr.toolbox.com/api/ContentVote/3035194/1/2/>
Hi David
Thanks for your response which is helpful. Part of what I'm looking for
are productivity measures and also whilst we do link performance plans
back to business plan it's about understanding how effective HR was in
contributing.
Thanks again, I need to use you input and make the measures more
specific.
Anushia
Sent from my BlackBerry(r) wireless device
-----Original Message-----
From: David_Alman via measurement-metrics
<measurement-metrics@hr.toolbox.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 07:23:04
To: <anushiaredd@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE:[measurement-metrics] HR Effectiveness
Posted by David_Alman (Contractor & Director)
on Oct 4 at 9:51 AM Mark as helpful
<http://hr.toolbox.com/api/ContentVote/3034497/1/2/>
Hi Anushia,
My response is quite different to those already provided, and so may be
offbeam. If so, apologies.
My understanding of the effectiveness and contribution of HR (as opposed
to its efficiency) is that its about its results. As a Director I assume
your (performance) action plan fits into the business/organisational
annual plan and contains measurable targets the business seeks from your
unit. In turn your staff have their performance action plans to achieve
(that are subsets of the Unit's plan). Your unit's effectiveness and
contribution therefore is based on two aspects: Meeting agreed targets,
and maintaining set (governance) standards. Trust this helps. David

Hi Gert, you make an important point about ""HR pushing back and
calibrating on the performance curve/bell curve."" I would be grateful
in terms of guidance how you go about doing this. I am talking in
particular when you talk about the scorecard which is system driven and
where the final score is basically seen after the fact or once the
process is complete and the ultimate score discussed with the
individual.

Where do we as HR and line come in to moderate or correct the anomally?

Posted by gertkriel (Head
Organisational Effectiveness)
on Oct 5 at 3:45 AM
Mark this reply as helpfulMark as helpful
<http://hr.toolbox.com/api/ContentVote/3035231/1/2/>
Hi Anushia,
Nice to hear from you again.
At the risk of not knowing exactly what the question was just the
following on HR's contribution to business success.
The ultimate productivity measure will be net profit per employee (FTE)
which should be shared by HR and line ito their respective scorecards
albeit with different weightings.
Then purely ito performance, HR should be measured by the alignment of
the hard results and performance contract content. Performance contracts
which carries a heavy weighting on financials should correlate highly
with the financial results such as asset and liaibility growth in
Banking, same argument for customer service and process. If your process
audits are mostly unacceptables, but your contracts which use process
measurements are high, there is a disconnect and it is HR's job to fix
this.
Then you also need to manage the performance curve as a whole. If your
business are doing poorly, but you sit with upwards of 40% 4 ratings on
a 5 point scale you are in trouble, because then your line people are
busy soft-scoring and entrenching an acceptance of poor performance. HR
need to push back and calibrate scoring across the business as this is
one of the biggest contributors to productivity.
This can be measured as well.

Posted by Anushia (Executive
Director, Organisational Effectiveness)
on Oct 5 at 3:22 AM
Mark this reply as helpfulMark as helpful
<http://hr.toolbox.com/api/ContentVote/3035194/1/2/>
Hi David
Thanks for your response which is helpful. Part of what I'm looking for
are productivity measures and also whilst we do link performance plans
back to business plan it's about understanding how effective HR was in
contributing.
Thanks again, I need to use you input and make the measures more
specific.
Anushia
Sent from my BlackBerry(r) wireless device
-----Original Message-----
From: David_Alman via measurement-metrics
<measurement-metrics@hr.toolbox.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 07:23:04
To: <anushiaredd@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE:[measurement-metrics] HR Effectiveness
Posted by David_Alman (Contractor & Director)
on Oct 4 at 9:51 AM Mark as helpful
<http://hr.toolbox.com/api/ContentVote/3034497/1/2/>
Hi Anushia,
My response is quite different to those already provided, and so may be
offbeam. If so, apologies.
My understanding of the effectiveness and contribution of HR (as opposed
to its efficiency) is that its about its results. As a Director I assume
your (performance) action plan fits into the business/organisational
annual plan and contains measurable targets the business seeks from your
unit. In turn your staff have their performance action plans to achieve
(that are subsets of the Unit's plan). Your unit's effectiveness and
contribution therefore is based on two aspects: Meeting agreed targets,
and maintaining set (governance) standards. Trust this helps. David

Answered

Sorry! Something went wrong on our end. Please try again later.

lynnemorton

October 05, 2009 09:10 AM

I believe that my colleague Gert Kriel has made some important points here!

Posted by gertkriel (Head
Organisational Effectiveness)
on Oct 5 at 3:45 AM
<http://hr.toolbox.com/api/ContentVote/3035231/1/2/> Mark this reply as
helpfulMark as helpful
Hi Anushia,
Nice to hear from you again.
At the risk of not knowing exactly what the question was just the
following on HR's contribution to business success.
The ultimate productivity measure will be net profit per employee (FTE)
which should be shared by HR and line ito their respective scorecards
albeit with different weightings.
Then purely ito performance, HR should be measured by the alignment of
the hard results and performance contract content. Performance contracts
which carries a heavy weighting on financials should correlate highly
with the financial results such as asset and liaibility growth in
Banking, same argument for customer service and process. If your process
audits are mostly unacceptables, but your contracts which use process
measurements are high, there is a disconnect and it is HR's job to fix
this.
Then you also need to manage the performance curve as a whole. If your
business are doing poorly, but you sit with upwards of 40% 4 ratings on
a 5 point scale you are in trouble, because then your line people are
busy soft-scoring and entrenching an acceptance of poor performance. HR
need to push back and calibrate scoring across the business as this is
one of the biggest contributors to productivity.
This can be measured as well.

Posted by Anushia (Executive
Director, Organisational Effectiveness)
on Oct 5 at 3:22 AM
Mark this reply as helpfulMark as helpful
<http://hr.toolbox.com/api/ContentVote/3035194/1/2/>
Hi David
Thanks for your response which is helpful. Part of what I'm looking for
are productivity measures and also whilst we do link performance plans
back to business plan it's about understanding how effective HR was in
contributing.
Thanks again, I need to use you input and make the measures more
specific.
Anushia
Sent from my BlackBerry(r) wireless device
-----Original Message-----
From: David_Alman via measurement-metrics
<measurement-metrics@hr.toolbox.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 07:23:04
To: <anushiaredd@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE:[measurement-metrics] HR Effectiveness
Posted by David_Alman (Contractor & Director)
on Oct 4 at 9:51 AM Mark as helpful
<http://hr.toolbox.com/api/ContentVote/3034497/1/2/>
Hi Anushia,
My response is quite different to those already provided, and so may be
offbeam. If so, apologies.
My understanding of the effectiveness and contribution of HR (as opposed
to its efficiency) is that its about its results. As a Director I assume
your (performance) action plan fits into the business/organisational
annual plan and contains measurable targets the business seeks from your
unit. In turn your staff have their performance action plans to achieve
(that are subsets of the Unit's plan). Your unit's effectiveness and
contribution therefore is based on two aspects: Meeting agreed targets,
and maintaining set (governance) standards. Trust this helps. David

The best productivity measure is the value added per person, and the best
productivity measure for dollars spent on labor is the value added per
dollar of cost of labor.
The vale added is EBITDA + Rent + Labor cost.
Muki

On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 9:31 AM, Anushia via measurement-metrics <
measurement-metrics@hr.toolbox.com> wrote:
> Posted by Anushia(Executive Director, Organisational Effectiveness)
> on Oct 5 at 3:22 AM
> Hi
> David
> Thanks for your response which is helpful. Part of what I'm looking for are
> productivity measures and also whilst we do link performance plans back to
> business plan it's about understanding how effective HR was in contributing.
>
> Thanks again, I need to use you input and make the measures more specific.
> Anushia
> Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David_Alman via measurement-metrics <
> measurement-metrics@hr.toolbox.com>
> Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 07:23:04
> To: <anushiaredd@hotmail.com>
> Subject: RE:[measurement-metrics] HR Effectiveness
>
>
>
> Posted by David_Alman (Contractor & Director)
> on Oct 4 at 9:51 AM Mark as helpful <
> http://hr.toolbox.com/api/ContentVote/3034497/1/2/>
> Hi Anushia,
> My response is quite different to those already provided, and so may be
> offbeam. If so, apologies.
> My understanding of the effectiveness and contribution of HR (as opposed to
> its efficiency) is that its about its results. As a Director I assume your
> (performance) action plan fits into the business/organisational annual plan
> and contains measurable targets the business seeks from your unit. In turn
> your staff have their performance action plans to achieve (that are subsets
> of the Unit's plan). Your unit's effectiveness and contribution therefore is
> based on two aspects: Meeting agreed targets, and maintaining set
> (governance) standards. Trust this helps. David

As with everything else, it cannot just be a cold factual exercise. I
draw the numbers and do the curves, comparing my regions against one
another to give them an internal norm as well as doing a comparison
against the rolled up results for the whole business. When you do this,
it becomes pretty evident to the Regional Manager that his region is
busy soft scoring and then the door is open for helpful discussion with
him and the HR line partners on how to rectify.

One simple way in which to rectify is to understand if line managers who
does the scoring all have the same understanding of the Key performance
indicator requirements, sometimes you find they do not. Where it is a
case of line managers not being able to look employees in the eye and
say to them ""You are a 2 rating for these reasons..."" this is to my mind
the domain of HR to help managers with constructive feedback process and
conflict management and coaching and mentoring etc

Posted by Mmaserame (Mrs)
on Oct 5 at 8:34 AM
Mark this reply as helpfulMark as helpful
<http://hr.toolbox.com/api/ContentVote/3035771/1/2/>
Hi Gert, you make an important point about ""HR pushing back and
calibrating on the performance curve/bell curve."" I would be grateful
in terms of guidance how you go about doing this. I am talking in
particular when you talk about the scorecard which is system driven and
where the final score is basically seen after the fact or once the
process is complete and the ultimate score discussed with the
individual.
Where do we as HR and line come in to moderate or correct the anomally?
Thank you
Cheryl.
________________________________
From: gertkriel via measurement-metrics
[mailto:measurement-metrics@hr.toolbox.com]
Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 9:57 AM
To: Rabashwa, Cheryl
Subject: RE: [measurement-metrics] HR Effectiveness

Posted by gertkriel (Head
Organisational Effectiveness)
on Oct 5 at 3:45 AM
Mark this reply as helpfulMark as helpful
<http://hr.toolbox.com/api/ContentVote/3035231/1/2/>
Hi Anushia,
Nice to hear from you again.
At the risk of not knowing exactly what the question was just the
following on HR's contribution to business success.
The ultimate productivity measure will be net profit per employee (FTE)
which should be shared by HR and line ito their respective scorecards
albeit with different weightings.
Then purely ito performance, HR should be measured by the alignment of
the hard results and performance contract content. Performance contracts
which carries a heavy weighting on financials should correlate highly
with the financial results such as asset and liaibility growth in
Banking, same argument for customer service and process. If your process
audits are mostly unacceptables, but your contracts which use process
measurements are high, there is a disconnect and it is HR's job to fix
this.
Then you also need to manage the performance curve as a whole. If your
business are doing poorly, but you sit with upwards of 40% 4 ratings on
a 5 point scale you are in trouble, because then your line people are
busy soft-scoring and entrenching an acceptance of poor performance. HR
need to push back and calibrate scoring across the business as this is
one of the biggest contributors to productivity.
This can be measured as well.
Kind regards
Gert Kriel
Head Organisational Development
Branch Banking
Human Resources
2nd Floor, 2 First Place
BankCity
Tel (011) 352-2337, Fax () , Cell 0837015830
e-mail gkriel@fnb.co.za <mailto:gkriel@fnb.co.za>
www.fnb.co.za <http://www.fnb.co.za> www.shine2010.co.za
<http://www.shine2010.co.za>
(c) 2005 FIFA(tm)
First National Bank - a division of FirstRand Bank Limited.
An Authorised Financial Services and Credit Provider (NCRCP20).
'Consider the effect on the environment before printing this email
________________________________
From: Anushia via measurement-metrics
[mailto:measurement-metrics@hr.toolbox.com]
Sent: 05 October 2009 09:31 AM
To: Kriel, Gert
Subject: Re: [measurement-metrics] HR Effectiveness
Posted by Anushia (Executive
Director, Organisational Effectiveness)
on Oct 5 at 3:22 AM
Mark this reply as helpfulMark as helpful
<http://hr.toolbox.com/api/ContentVote/3035194/1/2/>
Hi David
Thanks for your response which is helpful. Part of what I'm looking for
are productivity measures and also whilst we do link performance plans
back to business plan it's about understanding how effective HR was in
contributing.
Thanks again, I need to use you input and make the measures more
specific.
Anushia
Sent from my BlackBerry(r) wireless device
-----Original Message-----
From: David_Alman via measurement-metrics
<measurement-metrics@hr.toolbox.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 07:23:04
To: <anushiaredd@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE:[measurement-metrics] HR Effectiveness
Posted by David_Alman (Contractor & Director)
on Oct 4 at 9:51 AM Mark as helpful
<http://hr.toolbox.com/api/ContentVote/3034497/1/2/>
Hi Anushia,
My response is quite different to those already provided, and so may be
offbeam. If so, apologies.
My understanding of the effectiveness and contribution of HR (as opposed
to its efficiency) is that its about its results. As a Director I assume
your (performance) action plan fits into the business/organisational
annual plan and contains measurable targets the business seeks from your
unit. In turn your staff have their performance action plans to achieve
(that are subsets of the Unit's plan). Your unit's effectiveness and
contribution therefore is based on two aspects: Meeting agreed targets,
and maintaining set (governance) standards. Trust this helps. David

Posted by gertkriel (Head
Organisational Effectiveness)
on Oct 5 at 11:18 AM
Mark this reply as helpfulMark as helpful
<http://hr.toolbox.com/api/ContentVote/3036411/1/2/>
Hi Cheryl,
As with everything else, it cannot just be a cold factual exercise. I
draw the numbers and do the curves, comparing my regions against one
another to give them an internal norm as well as doing a comparison
against the rolled up results for the whole business. When you do this,
it becomes pretty evident to the Regional Manager that his region is
busy soft scoring and then the door is open for helpful discussion with
him and the HR line partners on how to rectify.
One simple way in which to rectify is to understand if line managers who
does the scoring all have the same understanding of the Key performance
indicator requirements, sometimes you find they do not. Where it is a
case of line managers not being able to look employees in the eye and
say to them ""You are a 2 rating for these reasons..."" this is to my mind
the domain of HR to help managers with constructive feedback process and
conflict management and coaching and mentoring etc
Kind regards
Gert
________________________________
From: Mmaserame via measurement-metrics
[mailto:measurement-metrics@hr.toolbox.com]
Sent: 05 October 2009 02:15 PM
To: Kriel, Gert
Subject: RE: [measurement-metrics] HR Effectiveness

Posted by Mmaserame (Mrs)
on Oct 5 at 8:34 AM
Mark this reply as helpfulMark as helpful
<http://hr.toolbox.com/api/ContentVote/3035771/1/2/>
Hi Gert, you make an important point about ""HR pushing back and
calibrating on the performance curve/bell curve."" I would be grateful
in terms of guidance how you go about doing this. I am talking in
particular when you talk about the scorecard which is system driven and
where the final score is basically seen after the fact or once the
process is complete and the ultimate score discussed with the
individual.
Where do we as HR and line come in to moderate or correct the anomally?
Thank you
Cheryl.
________________________________
From: gertkriel via measurement-metrics
[mailto:measurement-metrics@hr.toolbox.com]
Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 9:57 AM
To: Rabashwa, Cheryl
Subject: RE: [measurement-metrics] HR Effectiveness
Posted by gertkriel (Head
Organisational Effectiveness)
on Oct 5 at 3:45 AM
Mark this reply as helpfulMark as helpful
<http://hr.toolbox.com/api/ContentVote/3035231/1/2/>
Hi Anushia,
Nice to hear from you again.
At the risk of not knowing exactly what the question was just the
following on HR's contribution to business success.
The ultimate productivity measure will be net profit per employee (FTE)
which should be shared by HR and line ito their respective scorecards
albeit with different weightings.
Then purely ito performance, HR should be measured by the alignment of
the hard results and performance contract content. Performance contracts
which carries a heavy weighting on financials should correlate highly
with the financial results such as asset and liaibility growth in
Banking, same argument for customer service and process. If your process
audits are mostly unacceptables, but your contracts which use process
measurements are high, there is a disconnect and it is HR's job to fix
this.
Then you also need to manage the performance curve as a whole. If your
business are doing poorly, but you sit with upwards of 40% 4 ratings on
a 5 point scale you are in trouble, because then your line people are
busy soft-scoring and entrenching an acceptance of poor performance. HR
need to push back and calibrate scoring across the business as this is
one of the biggest contributors to productivity.
This can be measured as well.
Kind regards
Gert Kriel
Head Organisational Development
Branch Banking
Human Resources
2nd Floor, 2 First Place
BankCity
Tel (011) 352-2337, Fax () , Cell 0837015830
e-mail gkriel@fnb.co.za <mailto:gkriel@fnb.co.za>
www.fnb.co.za <http://www.fnb.co.za> www.shine2010.co.za
<http://www.shine2010.co.za>
(c) 2005 FIFA(tm)
First National Bank - a division of FirstRand Bank Limited.
An Authorised Financial Services and Credit Provider (NCRCP20).
'Consider the effect on the environment before printing this email
________________________________
From: Anushia via measurement-metrics
[mailto:measurement-metrics@hr.toolbox.com]
Sent: 05 October 2009 09:31 AM
To: Kriel, Gert
Subject: Re: [measurement-metrics] HR Effectiveness
Posted by Anushia (Executive
Director, Organisational Effectiveness)
on Oct 5 at 3:22 AM
Mark this reply as helpfulMark as helpful
<http://hr.toolbox.com/api/ContentVote/3035194/1/2/>
Hi David
Thanks for your response which is helpful. Part of what I'm looking for
are productivity measures and also whilst we do link performance plans
back to business plan it's about understanding how effective HR was in
contributing.
Thanks again, I need to use you input and make the measures more
specific.
Anushia
Sent from my BlackBerry(r) wireless device
-----Original Message-----
From: David_Alman via measurement-metrics
<measurement-metrics@hr.toolbox.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 07:23:04
To: <anushiaredd@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE:[measurement-metrics] HR Effectiveness
Posted by David_Alman (Contractor & Director)
on Oct 4 at 9:51 AM Mark as helpful
<http://hr.toolbox.com/api/ContentVote/3034497/1/2/>
Hi Anushia,
My response is quite different to those already provided, and so may be
offbeam. If so, apologies.
My understanding of the effectiveness and contribution of HR (as opposed
to its efficiency) is that its about its results. As a Director I assume
your (performance) action plan fits into the business/organisational
annual plan and contains measurable targets the business seeks from your
unit. In turn your staff have their performance action plans to achieve
(that are subsets of the Unit's plan). Your unit's effectiveness and
contribution therefore is based on two aspects: Meeting agreed targets,
and maintaining set (governance) standards. Trust this helps. David

Cyndi I assume you realise that there are numerous providers, some of whom have been operating for years, that have this capability. This is hardly new...and I find it difficult to see how ""aquire"" can advertise they provide the ""only hierarchy-driven workforce solution on the market"" when this is patently not true.
In fact I distinctly recall using a ""hierarchy driven workforce analytics solution"" over 10 years ago. Additionally the ""talent pipeline"" feature in the brochure looks a lot like Markov diagrams which you will find in textbooks from the 1980's and again I dont understand how anyone can say they are new or exclusive.

Answered

Sorry! Something went wrong on our end. Please try again later.

David_Alman

October 05, 2009 08:08 PM

Thanks Anushia for your considerate response. I guess, generically, what I'm suggesting is define a model, or framework, the executive would accept first then determine the measures of productivity, value adding contribution, costs etc. The GTE HR Linkage Model is an example (I only use that cos the Figure in The HR Scorecard book's been accessible for some time, rather than suggesting it as an answer in this case - which I don't). I believe a contemporary -strategic - model could be developed that would relate to what's going on in your sector. Best wishes David

I'd be very interested in learning about products that automatically calculate these metrics for every manager, box, or org unit in a hierarchy. I have no doubt that analysts do this manually for each node in the hierarchy. Would you be more specific about which tools do this automatically?
As for the Talent Pipeline's similarity to a Markov model, the Talent Pipeline shows movement through an organization in the context of workforce analytics. There are many ways to represent transition of state and the Talent Pipeline is specific to human resources.

Posted by David_Alman (Contractor & Director)
on Oct 5 at 8:08 PM Mark as helpful <http://hr.toolbox.com/api/ContentVote/3037288/1/2/>
Thanks Anushia for your considerate response. I guess, generically, what I'm suggesting is define a model, or framework, the executive would accept first then determine the measures of productivity, value adding contribution, costs etc. The GTE HR Linkage Model is an example (I only use that cos the Figure in The HR Scorecard book's been accessible for some time, rather than suggesting it as an answer in this case - which I don't). I believe a contemporary -strategic - model could be developed that would relate to what's going on in your sector. Best wishes David

Fully agree with your last paragraph as I have experienced the Line
Managers tendency to soft scoring and more heavily here in Asia .
Interested about your point that HR need to ""push back and calibrate
.... Prractically how do you do it ?

Posted by gertkriel
(Head Organisational
Effectiveness)
on Oct 5 at 3:45 AM Mark this reply as helpfulMark as helpful
<http://hr.toolbox.com/api/ContentVote/3035231/1/2/>
Hi Anushia,
Nice to hear from you again.
At the risk of not knowing exactly what the question was just the
following on HR's contribution to business success.
The ultimate productivity measure will be net profit per employee (FTE)
which should be shared by HR and line ito their respective scorecards
albeit with different weightings.
Then purely ito performance, HR should be measured by the alignment of
the hard results and performance contract content. Performance contracts
which carries a heavy weighting on financials should correlate highly
with the financial results such as asset and liaibility growth in
Banking, same argument for customer service and process. If your process
audits are mostly unacceptables, but your contracts which use process
measurements are high, there is a disconnect and it is HR's job to fix
this.
Then you also need to manage the performance curve as a whole. If your
business are doing poorly, but you sit with upwards of 40% 4 ratings on
a 5 point scale you are in trouble, because then your line people are
busy soft-scoring and entrenching an acceptance of poor performance. HR
need to push back and calibrate scoring across the business as this is
one of the biggest contributors to productivity.
This can be measured as well.

Posted by Anushia (Executive
Director, Organisational Effectiveness)
on Oct 5 at 3:22 AM
Mark this reply as helpfulMark as helpful
<http://hr.toolbox.com/api/ContentVote/3035194/1/2/>
Hi David
Thanks for your response which is helpful. Part of what I'm looking for
are productivity measures and also whilst we do link performance plans
back to business plan it's about understanding how effective HR was in
contributing.
Thanks again, I need to use you input and make the measures more
specific.
Anushia
Sent from my BlackBerry(r) wireless device
-----Original Message-----
From: David_Alman via measurement-metrics
<measurement-metrics@hr.toolbox.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 07:23:04
To: <anushiaredd@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE:[measurement-metrics] HR Effectiveness
Posted by David_Alman (Contractor & Director)
on Oct 4 at 9:51 AM Mark as helpful
<http://hr.toolbox.com/api/ContentVote/3034497/1/2/>
Hi Anushia,
My response is quite different to those already provided, and so may be
offbeam. If so, apologies.
My understanding of the effectiveness and contribution of HR (as opposed
to its efficiency) is that its about its results. As a Director I assume
your (performance) action plan fits into the business/organisational
annual plan and contains measurable targets the business seeks from your
unit. In turn your staff have their performance action plans to achieve
(that are subsets of the Unit's plan). Your unit's effectiveness and
contribution therefore is based on two aspects: Meeting agreed targets,
and maintaining set (governance) standards. Trust this helps. David

A simple way to push back, is to show the performance scoring normal
distribution curve of the area that they are responsible for, in
comparison to their peers and higher level organization, so if your
business for example are using a 5 point scale and they rate above 35%
of their total workforce a 4/5, the warning lights should go on,
especially when you now take their ""hard"" evidence such as net profit
and do the same comparison and you find that based on net profit, they
sit on the 25th percentile but based on scoring they sit on the 75th
(extreme example to prove the point). Any line manager will now see that
they are busy soft scoring.

To calibrate, there are a couple of ways, but here I find that using
line manager peers work best, so if you do the comparisons and find that
manager ""x"" performance scores are in line with his/her net profit
achievement, you can set up a coaching relationship between him/her and
the line manager who practices soft scoring. Should the trend continue,
you should redline him at the next higher level Executive committee
until the behaviour stops. I must add though I am not culturally wise
when it comes to Asian culture, but I have found that where you use
logic and peer comparisons, line managers understand your point.

Posted by THL_Lacarne (Asia
Director of Human Resources)
on Oct 7 at 3:29 AM
Mark this reply as helpfulMark as helpful
<http://hr.toolbox.com/api/ContentVote/3040696/1/2/>
Hi Gert,
Fully agree with your last paragraph as I have experienced the Line
Managers tendency to soft scoring and more heavily here in Asia .
Interested about your point that HR need to ""push back and calibrate
.... Prractically how do you do it ?
Im voraus vielen danken
Thierry
________________________________
From: gertkriel via measurement-metrics
[mailto:measurement-metrics@hr.toolbox.com]
Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 3:57 PM
To: Lacarne Thierry - HRS
Subject: RE: [measurement-metrics] HR Effectiveness
Posted by gertkriel
(Head Organisational
Effectiveness)
on Oct 5 at 3:45 AM Mark this reply as helpfulMark as helpful
<http://hr.toolbox.com/api/ContentVote/3035231/1/2/>
Hi Anushia,
Nice to hear from you again.
At the risk of not knowing exactly what the question was just the
following on HR's contribution to business success.
The ultimate productivity measure will be net profit per employee (FTE)
which should be shared by HR and line ito their respective scorecards
albeit with different weightings.
Then purely ito performance, HR should be measured by the alignment of
the hard results and performance contract content. Performance contracts
which carries a heavy weighting on financials should correlate highly
with the financial results such as asset and liaibility growth in
Banking, same argument for customer service and process. If your process
audits are mostly unacceptables, but your contracts which use process
measurements are high, there is a disconnect and it is HR's job to fix
this.
Then you also need to manage the performance curve as a whole. If your
business are doing poorly, but you sit with upwards of 40% 4 ratings on
a 5 point scale you are in trouble, because then your line people are
busy soft-scoring and entrenching an acceptance of poor performance. HR
need to push back and calibrate scoring across the business as this is
one of the biggest contributors to productivity.
This can be measured as well.
Kind regards
Gert Kriel
Head Organisational Development
Branch Banking
Human Resources
2nd Floor, 2 First Place
BankCity
Tel (011) 352-2337, Fax () , Cell 0837015830
e-mail gkriel@fnb.co.za <mailto:gkriel@fnb.co.za>
www.fnb.co.za <http://www.fnb.co.za> www.shine2010.co.za
<http://www.shine2010.co.za>
(c) 2005 FIFA(tm)
First National Bank - a division of FirstRand Bank Limited.
An Authorised Financial Services and Credit Provider (NCRCP20).
'Consider the effect on the environment before printing this email
________________________________
From: Anushia via measurement-metrics
[mailto:measurement-metrics@hr.toolbox.com]
Sent: 05 October 2009 09:31 AM
To: Kriel, Gert
Subject: Re: [measurement-metrics] HR Effectiveness
Posted by Anushia (Executive
Director, Organisational Effectiveness)
on Oct 5 at 3:22 AM
Mark this reply as helpfulMark as helpful
<http://hr.toolbox.com/api/ContentVote/3035194/1/2/>
Hi David
Thanks for your response which is helpful. Part of what I'm looking for
are productivity measures and also whilst we do link performance plans
back to business plan it's about understanding how effective HR was in
contributing.
Thanks again, I need to use you input and make the measures more
specific.
Anushia
Sent from my BlackBerry(r) wireless device
-----Original Message-----
From: David_Alman via measurement-metrics
<measurement-metrics@hr.toolbox.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 07:23:04
To: <anushiaredd@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE:[measurement-metrics] HR Effectiveness
Posted by David_Alman (Contractor & Director)
on Oct 4 at 9:51 AM Mark as helpful
<http://hr.toolbox.com/api/ContentVote/3034497/1/2/>
Hi Anushia,
My response is quite different to those already provided, and so may be
offbeam. If so, apologies.
My understanding of the effectiveness and contribution of HR (as opposed
to its efficiency) is that its about its results. As a Director I assume
your (performance) action plan fits into the business/organisational
annual plan and contains measurable targets the business seeks from your
unit. In turn your staff have their performance action plans to achieve
(that are subsets of the Unit's plan). Your unit's effectiveness and
contribution therefore is based on two aspects: Meeting agreed targets,
and maintaining set (governance) standards. Trust this helps. David